I guess the first Ryzen was technically only 9 years ago, and sure there the X3D is kind of a leap but that’s still resulted in comparatively marginal gains compared to what happened in the previous 10 years where it was easily a 5x delta. Meanwhile Intel is just cramming more and more E cores into things and pretending they’re doing better.
For the average person I really doubt CPU speed from 10 years ago or today makes all that much difference if both systems run from an NVMe.
Sure you can run a perfectly useable machine from 10 years ago but there is a massive difference in performance between an ryzen 9600 based system and an ryzen 1600 system.
I do agree with you that performance increase are nowhere as fast as it used to be. But we were also stuck with 4 core intel cpu’s for a decade before that.
Well if you believe the benchmarks it’s about a 2x gain in pure compute, but only about 1.5x in actual speed when you consider cache and other bottlenecks. The X3D is similarly 2x as fast but adds another 25% on top of that given better cache locality. The transistor size density delta of 14 to 4nm would make me expect more of a 3-4x raw speed difference.
Sure the increase isn’t as massive as it was but it is definetly a very noticeable increase in performance if you come fro m a 6700k but if you are running an Amd 5800 or an intel 12700, the performance increase is not worth the money.
I defintely has improved a lot since Amd became competitive with Intel.
I guess the first Ryzen was technically only 9 years ago, and sure there the X3D is kind of a leap but that’s still resulted in comparatively marginal gains compared to what happened in the previous 10 years where it was easily a 5x delta. Meanwhile Intel is just cramming more and more E cores into things and pretending they’re doing better.
For the average person I really doubt CPU speed from 10 years ago or today makes all that much difference if both systems run from an NVMe.
Sure you can run a perfectly useable machine from 10 years ago but there is a massive difference in performance between an ryzen 9600 based system and an ryzen 1600 system. I do agree with you that performance increase are nowhere as fast as it used to be. But we were also stuck with 4 core intel cpu’s for a decade before that.
Well if you believe the benchmarks it’s about a 2x gain in pure compute, but only about 1.5x in actual speed when you consider cache and other bottlenecks. The X3D is similarly 2x as fast but adds another 25% on top of that given better cache locality. The transistor size density delta of 14 to 4nm would make me expect more of a 3-4x raw speed difference.
Sure the increase isn’t as massive as it was but it is definetly a very noticeable increase in performance if you come fro m a 6700k but if you are running an Amd 5800 or an intel 12700, the performance increase is not worth the money.